Posted on 05/01/2006 8:29:14 AM PDT by SirLinksalot
Why would I want fossils destroyed? That's a ridiculous assumption on your part. I think science is great. But I also understand how it changes so I'm not too worried about evolution. It will eventually be proven that humans didn't descend from ape-like creatures.
I'm not sure what you mean.
How does it strengthen the creationist position? By what? Proving a young Earth? Oh... well gee... I suppose if we ignore radiometric dating you might have a point there. But since we cannot... all we can say is there is more proof of Santa Claus and Elvis still living than there is of creation. Now... is that spin? Nope just cold hard facts... which is mighty inconvenient of me I know.
ping for later
"How do you know? Where you there?"
The image is an insect fossil dated to the Devonian. That's something like 350-400 million years old. Though it has been totally fossilized, its physical shape is in excellent condition. Of course, it woudn't be in the same condition. Bone fossils in earth calcify, while insect fossils are permiated by the sap.
In this article, they took mineralized tissues and soaked them in a mild acid bath that would eat away calcium. What was left were some tissues that had not *completely* fossilized.
If the physical structure of a 300 million year old fossil may remain largely in tact, why should it be impossible that some tough connective tissue not completely fossilize when surrounded and permiated by minerals?
Science has always described fossilization as a gradual process. That we should find partially fossilized tissue, as exciting of a discovery as it is, should not be construed as the downfall of science.
There is a simple molecule, tetraethyldiamine, which is also known as putrescin. It gets this descriptive name because it smells like rotting flesh. It is produced by the degradation of proteins in a dead animal. Putrescin and other simple amines and sulfur-containing molecules could stay trapped in the rock until released with excavation. Just because something's been dead for millions of years doesn't mean it can't smell like anything.
"The ends justify the means."
Not to mention the relative strategraphic positioning of the rocks. In other words, the rocks which were laid down first (underneath others) are older than the ones on top; in every case, the fossils found in the older beds have been found to be older by various other dating methods.
ID'ers/YECs - show me just ONE example of a fossil of a modern human in the same sedimentary rock layer as a dinosaur, OR IN AN EARLIER LAYER, and I will admit you are right. Or the fossil of a T-rex with a modern animal in its jaws or gut, or a modern predator with the remains of a dinosaur. You won't find one.
OH I am sooo sorry... but wasn't it you who said "As long as we win in the end..."? Hey... what do you know you DID say that? I am sure the Taliban, Stalin, Pol Pot, and many more have said the same thing. Normally people who make such statements don't give damned about truth and often go out of their way to rid themselves of any opposition to their beliefs. Sorry... I am always so cynical of those who are truth stompers but you see... that is how I see ID'ers... I see them as wanting to indoctrinate everyone into their cult.
Now you know what... if a scientist actually proposed a theory that was different from Evolution but explained what we see in the fossil record and what we see today that is perfectly fine. But to say... we are all designed by an Intelligent Designer...and the proof is what? NOTHING? And then you use political pressure and bullying tactics to push that as an equivalent theory to Evolution in public schools and complain when scientists won't give you the time of day... Well... you are no more scientific than PT Barnum in my book. How simple must I explain this?
You did read that part about how she's a Christian, didn't you? I would hardly think that qualifies as "worshiping Evolution".
Man, that hyperbole gets tired......
Oh... my bad sorry.
Evolution doesn't try to predict decay as far as I know.
I didn't think it was the downfall of science at all. I thought it was pretty cool.
How about a human's remains in the stomach of a T. rex? That would be nifty!
"However, it is unfortunately more likely that the sample will prove to be fully mineralized and lacking any utilizable amount of untransformed biomolecules."
Thanks. Maybe another example of sensationalism.
I wonder what the cholesterol levels were...
What is your point? To not allow any opposition to TOE? LOL
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.